Rape – All about power and control Or an evolutionary option?

First ---- Rape is a crime and one that commits such an act against another person should be punished – no doubt. This is not a thread about whether rape is wrong – it is. And the harm goes much deeper than physical injury. So - this thread is in no way saying that rape occurs naturally and so it's OK. It's wrong in the same way that our natural emotion called "aggression" leads, sometimes, to murder -

OK – with that said, I wonder if ya’ll want to talk some about the idea floating out there that rape is about "control and power" and has nothing or little to do with sex / procreation. I think it does.

Women and men have vastly different interests when it comes to sex. A man’s interest is to impregnate as many women as he can before the last taking of toast and tea. A woman’s interest is to ensure that the man will help with the child both before and after birth. Rape occurs when a man is inclined, the community has broken down during events like war (social chastisement will not occur/family is not available to take retribution), he has little or no chance of convincing the woman by other methods (wine doesn’t work) -----

Rape can result in conception and that will pass the genes of the rapist. In fact, if rape were about control and/or power it would appear than women who were raped would be spread fairly evenly by age. This isn’t the case however. Rape victims are overwhelmingly women who are in their peak reproductive years.

A man’s interest is to impregnate as many women as he can before the last taking of toast and tea.

I thought they cared more about the sex act itself than conception. It ain’t no thinkin’ thang; Mother Nature may want pregnancy, but men want the sex act (don't worry, you won't get pregnant).

Rape occurs when a man is inclined, the community has broken down during events like war (social chastisement will not occur/family is not available to take retribution), he has little or no chance of convincing the woman by other methods (wine doesn’t work) -----

Rape can result in conception and that will pass the genes of the rapist…

I might expect more rapists to kidnap women and have continued relations with them until such time as they become pregnant, but I don't know the figures. Why do some men murder the women following, or even before, the rape? (not much chance for childbirth going on there).

In fact, if rape were about control and/or power it would appear than women who were raped would be spread fairly evenly by age. This isn’t the case however. Rape victims are overwhelmingly women who are in their peak reproductive years.

Of course; would you be more interested in grandma or her attractive grand daughter?

In fact, if rape were about control and/or power it would appear than women who were raped would be spread fairly evenly by age. This isn’t the case however. Rape victims are overwhelmingly women who are in their peak reproductive years.

It might be worth clarifying whether we are discussing acquaintance rape or stranger rape. In the case of acquaintance rape, while it may have something to do with power/aggression, it's more likely misinterpretation of what has been communicated about denial of consent, or judgement clouded by substance use (i.e., alcohol, drugs) and the man's inability to control their sexual desires. A lot of young women are raped in this way, often because young people in general too often wind up in situations they aren't prepared to handle due to inexperience.

In the case of stranger rape, I think the victim demographics would be different than those of acquaintance rape. This is more a crime of opportunity...a woman is out alone, isolated, unaware of the danger...the rapist sees a target and goes for her. In the case of stranger rape, it is not about sexual attraction or reproduction, although the rapist may derive some sort of sexual pleasure from the act, at least sufficiently to commit the act, the basic motivation is about the power, dominance, aggression.

In this paper we respond to two frequent criticisms of our book, A
Natural History of Rape (Thornhill & Palmer: 2000). The first
criticism portrays the book as little more than a "just-so"
story that human rape is an adaptation, We demonstrate that this
portrayal is not accurate. The second criticism reflects a common
response to the book's challenge of the popular assertion that
rapists are not motivated by sexual desire but instead commit these
crimes motivated by the urge to power; domination, and violence, and the
urge to degrade and humiliate women. We demonstrate that such criticisms
of our book are inherently contradictory and illogical. We believe it is
important for sex researchers to understand that these sorts of
criticisms are seriously flawed so that future research efforts toward
understanding the causes of sexual coercion are not stalled.

How do you define rape in non-human primates? Unless the female is ovulating, it's not adaptive to mate, if anything, it's maladaptive to waste the energy and sperm on an infertile female. If the female is ovulating, then she will be in estrus and receptive to the males, not rejecting them, so it's not rape. Humans are a little different from our primate relatives in that women aren't restricted to sexual receptivity only close to the time of ovulation.

I also think it would be maladaptive to resort to rape as a means of impregnating a woman for two reasons. First, a rapist would not know the cycle status of the woman, so it would be wasteful of energy if she is not fertile. Second, from an evolutionary standpoint (obviously modern society has compensated for this to a considerable extent), given the long time it takes for a human child to reach reproductive maturity, two parents are an advantage to survival of the offspring. In addition, if the female did not choose her mate, she is also less likely to ensure the survival of that offspring, so there's nothing to ensure that baby, once born, would be cared for at all (and in modern society, it's even more likely any resulting pregnancy would be aborted).

With regard to whether sexual desire is part of the motivation for rape, I haven't really delved into that literature, what there may be of it, but my guess is that there is probably a short-circuit somewhere that blurs that line for the rapist, either in impulse control, processing rejection, or in crossed signals where dominance and agression become sexually arousing (perhaps an even greater extreme than exists among the population who find S&M sexually arousing). As with other criminal behaviors, I would suspect there is a good deal of variation among individuals as to the root causes of their actions, no one size fits all explanation.

How do you define rape in non-human primates? Unless the female is ovulating, it's not adaptive to mate, if anything, it's maladaptive to waste the energy and sperm on an infertile female. If the female is ovulating, then she will be in estrus and receptive to the males, not rejecting them, so it's not rape. Humans are a little different from our primate relatives in that women aren't restricted to sexual receptivity only close to the time of ovulation….

First, the energy expended by a male during copulation can be recovered by eating a grape. OK - 10 grapes. Of course, this different for a human female who carries and nourishes a baby for nine months, places her life at risk during childbirth, and then must care for the baby/child all through the human extended childhood. That energy might be recovered by eating 50 million grapes give or take a few hundred thousand. Hence – the male is a non-discriminating copulating machine while it is in the female’s interest to pick a male who shows signs of 'love' (e.g. he’ll hang around) and signs of being a good provider for her and the baby (e.g. rich) - Both 'qualities' help ensure additional life expectancy in the competitive world where warmth and food are scarce and preditors and enemies are plentiful-

In regards to the existance of rape (in its various forms) in other primates - here's some observations from Jane Goodall --

…Jane Goodall provides us with a compelling example of how males use violence to get sex. In her 1986 book, The Chimpanzees of Gombe, Goodall describes the chimpanzee dating game. In one of several scenarios, males gather around attractive estrous females and try to lure them away from other males for a one-on-one sexual expedition that may last for days or weeks. But females find some suitors more appealing than others and often resist the advances of less desirable males. Males often rely on aggression to counter female resistance. For example, Goodall describes how Evered, in "persuading" a reluctant Winkle to accompany him into the forest, attacked her six times over the course of five hours, twice severely.

Sometimes, as I saw in Gombe, a male chimpanzee even attacks an estrous female days before he tries to mate with her. Goodall thinks that a male uses such aggression to train a female to fear him so that she will be more likely to surrender to his subsequent sexual advances. Similarly, male hamadryas baboons, who form small harems by kidnapping child brides, maintain a tight rein over their females through threats and intimidation. If, when another male is nearby, a hamadryas female strays even a few feet from her mate, he shoots her a threatening stare and raises his brows. She usually responds by rushing to his side; if not, he bites the back of her neck. The neck bite is ritualized-the male does not actually sink his razor-sharp canines into her flesh-but the threat of injury is clear. By repeating this behavior hundreds of times, the male lays claim to particular females months or even years before mating with them. When a female comes into estrus, she solicits sex only from her harem master, and other males rarely challenge his sexual rights to her.

These chimpanzee and hamadryas males are practicing sexual coercion: male use of force to increase the chances that a female victim will mate with him, or to decrease the chances that she will mate with someone else. But sexual coercion is much more common in some primate species than in others. Orangutans and chimpanzees are the only nonhuman primates whose males in the wild force females to copulate, while males of several other species, such as vervet monkeys and bonobos (pygmy chimpanzees), rarely if ever try to coerce females sexually. Between the two extremes lie many species, like hamadryas baboons, in which males do not force copulation but nonetheless use threats and intimidation to get sex….

Moonbear said:

…I also think it would be maladaptive to resort to rape as a means of impregnating a woman for two reasons. First, a rapist would not know the cycle status of the woman, so it would be wasteful of energy if she is not fertile. Second, from an evolutionary standpoint (obviously modern society has compensated for this to a considerable extent), given the long time it takes for a human child to reach reproductive maturity, two parents are an advantage to survival of the offspring. In addition, if the female did not choose her mate, she is also less likely to ensure the survival of that offspring, so there's nothing to ensure that baby, once born, would be cared for at all (and in modern society, it's even more likely any resulting pregnancy would be aborted).

No doubt it’s maladaptive for the female because of the personal risks already described. BUT why is it maladaptive for the raping male? Again, there is nothing to risk for him but the wrath of the female’s relatives and/or society. If those aren’t factors than most of the risk disappears. If the male can’t win the woman’s consent by other methods than rape might be an evolutionary alternative that would allow his genes to pass.

And where can we fit in child rapists here?
Reproducing can't be the reason they rape.
And i can't imagine the feeling of power beeing the reason.
I mean, children aren't much of a "force" to have power over.

Or does this fall in a totally different klass of thinking/motivation?

Clearly the sex drive exists to promote reproduction. Rape must at least be partially, if not primarily, a product of the sex drive. A male seeking sex, no matter in what way, is actually seeking reproduction whether consciously or not.

The rapist and the victim have many genes in common. And being raped is not good for a womens well being, harming her reproductive potential. Nor is it good for the community as a whole and hence the collective gene pool. From that stand point raping a women can be harmfull to the rapists shared genes. Rape also puts the rapists life in danger, which of course would be gambling the ability to reproduce entirely.

In, I guess, indirect response to those posts above --- please make what you will of this.

Here is a link and quote from an artcle from Scientic American, provided at a University of Chicago site - which discusses rape in primates and evidence of an evolved - alternate strategy for passing genes when you happen not to be the local alpha male ---

…Among male orangutans, though, the cause of arrested development seems to lie in the animals’ social environment. The presence of dominant adult males appears to delay the maturation of adolescent males in the same vicinity. Until recently, researchers believed that they were observing a stress-induced pathology that is, the adolescent orangutans stopped developing because the adult males bullied and frightened them. Over the past few years, however, we have conducted studies suggesting that arrested development among orangutans is not a pathology but an adaptive evolutionary strategy. The arrested adolescent males are capable of impregnating females, and by staying small and immature (in terms of secondary sexual features) they minimize the amount of food they need and lower the risk of serious conflict with adult males. But the strategy of these arrested adolescents has a disquieting aspect: they copulate forcibly with females. In other words, they rape….

…Apparently, arrested adolescents are neither stressed nor reproductively suppressed. What is going on? … Instead male primates can choose alternative strategies to maximize their reproductive success. Why should there be alternatives? Because the seemingly logical strategy developing powerful muscles and dramatic secondary sexual characteristics to excel at male-male competition has some serious drawbacks. In many species, maintaining those secondary characteristics requires elevated testosterone levels, which have a variety of adverse effects on health. The aggression that comes with such a strategy is not great for health either.

Furthermore, increased body mass means greater metabolic demands and more pressure for successful food acquisition. During famines, the bigger primates are less likely to survive. For an arboreal species such as the orangutan, the heavier body of the mature male also limits which trees and branches can be accessed
for food. And the development of secondary sexual characteristics makes a male more conspicuous, both to predators and to other males that view those characteristics as a challenge. The competition between adult males and developing adolescents probably explains the elevated levels of stress hormones
in the latter. …

... So how do the arrested males mate? Observations of orangutans both in the wild and in captive populations have indicated that the arrested males forcibly copulate with females. Rape is an apt term for these copulations: the adult females usually resist the arrested adolescents fiercely, biting the males whenever they can and emitting loud, guttural sounds (called rape grunts) that are heard only under these circumstances. Adult males sometimes rape, too, but not nearly as often as the arrested males. In a study conducted in Borneo during the early 1980s, Mitani and his field assistants observed 151 copulations by arrested males; 144 of the matings were forced. Thus, two reproductive strategies appear to have evolved for adolescent male orangutans…

NOW -- Add this concept / study to that information provided in the post directly above.

Below is a cite to the results of a major study of monozygotic twins reared apart. This long term study indicates personality seems to be strongly heritable for most traits. So, while this might have been turned into a political issue in the community that is discussing this issue (see Internet) – the evidence is strong that more than our physical appearance is substantially affected by our genetic makeup. There are numerious studies out there that support the conclusion that we are affected by our genes both in and out. Considering this and the evidence already presented in this thread – it doesn't take much of an imagination to suspect that rape behavior might very well be, at least in some aspect, a product of evolution – rather than as some advocate – all socialized into the individual.

Since 1979, a continuing study of monozygotic and dizygotic twins, separated in infancy and reared apart, has subjected more than 100 sets of reared-apart twins or triplets to a week of intensive psychological and physiological assessment... On multiple measures of personality and temperament, occupational and leisure-time interests, and social attitudes, monozygotic twins reared apart are about as similar as are monozygotic twins reared together. These findings extend and support those from numerous other twin, family, and adoption studies. It is a plausible hypothesis that genetic differences affect psychological differences largely indirectly, by influencing the effective environment of the developing child. This evidence for the strong heritability of most psychological traits, sensibly construed, does not detract from the value or importance of parenting, education, and other propaedeutic interventions.

The study of these reared-apart twins has led to two general and seemingly remarkable conclusions concerning the sources of the psychological differences - behavioral variation - between people: (i) genetic factors exert a pronounced and pervasive influence on behavioral variability, and (ii) the effect of being reared in the same home is negligible for many psychological traits. These conclusions will not come as revelations to the many behavioral geneticists who have observed similar results and drawn similar conclusions [5]. This study and the broader behavioral genetic literature, nevertheless, challenge prevailing psychological theories on the origins of individual differences in ability, personality, interests, and social attitudes [6]…

…According to the National Crime Victimization Survey there were an estimated 248,000 rapes and sexual assaults against victims over the age of 12 in the US in 2001. (US Department of Justice)

According to the National Victim Center, 683,000 women are raped each year. (1992)

Only 2% of rapists are convicted and imprisoned. (US Senate Judiciary Committee 1993)…

Among female rape victims, 61% are under age 18. (American Academy of Pediatrics, 1995)…

22% of females raped are under the age of 12 years; 32% are 12-17 years old; 29% 18-24 years old; 17% over 25 years old. 83% of those raped are under the age of 25 years old. (National Institute of Justice 1998)…

Note the victim age in the quote above. The age of rape victims are NOT randomly distributed as one might think they should be if rape were only motivated by the desire for control / power as some suggest. Rape victims tend to be those females who are in the child bearing age range. Why?